TalkChess.com

The top contenders in such competitions consist of narrow books targeted at stockfish and filled with killer lines. I wouldn't say that a good wider and useful book is anywhere near 100 elo.

Ron

Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2019 2:32 am A good book is worth about 100 Elo

https://sites.google.com/site/computers ... book-cs-23
SCCT XXIII's Champion: Attacker - Congrats to Adrian Costinescu!

Code: Select all

        # PLAYER                : RATING    POINTS    GAMES   (%)
       1 Attacker Pro 3        : 3562.9     866.5    1460   59.3%
...
       92 No Book               : 3451.3     281.0     640   43.9%

Difference of 111 Elo (give or take a little).

Now, SF recently won TCEC so it is likely a little stronger on equal ground.
Hence with a book, given a long tournament, winning is likely.

But consider all the unstated variables...
LC0 Elo seems to grow faster than SF Elo.
Shall we give LC0 four of these 2080 TI cards?
https://www.segmentblue.com/best-graphi ... tx-2080-ti
Or how about a whole rack of these:
https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/05/10 ... processor/
But maybe we give Stockfish the "128 cpu's x32 threads Cluster System" that gets 4,801,341,606 NPS using 4096 threads described here:
http://www.ipmanchess.yolasite.com/amd- ... -bench.php

Of course the real question we are all asking ourselves is, "What does the future hold for chess engines?"
We can wonder what direction things will take. Will a hybrid strategy be best?
But of course, nobody knows the answer to any of these questions.
Still, it's always fun to discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I think it's 13.

Brainfish will ad about 100 Elo. Dann is right.

Leo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:59 pm What is BookX.bin ?

It was described by others in other threads, but I didn't found a place where I could download it.

Ron Langeveld wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:58 am The top contenders in such competitions consist of narrow books targeted at stockfish and filled with killer lines. I wouldn't say that a good wider and useful book is anywhere near 100 elo.

No doubt you are correct, because the contests are dominated by SF entries.
However, the original question was about LC0 verses SF, so I think the analysis probably holds.

I have made the following experiment. Using the pgn Balsa25Top, Lc0 without book and BrainFish with Cerebellum light Book with best move activated.
So that the pgn positions provide variety and the book of BrainFish avoid opening errors by Stockfish. From the pgn positions BrainFish played following Cerebellum book while Lc0 started thinking by itself.

At 5 minutes plus 3 seconds Lc0 on GTX1060x2 and Brainfish on i7 980X 6 cores

1 BrainFish_181219 +50 +14/=32/-4 60.00% 30.0/50
2 Lc0_41439x2 -50 +4/=32/-14 40.00% 20.0/50

https://sites.google.com/site/unoallavo ... ects=0&d=1

At 25 minutes plus 10 seconds GTX1060x2

1 BrainFish_181219 +27 +6/=42/-2 54.00% 27.0/50
2 Lc0_41439x2 -27 +2/=42/-6 46.00% 23.0/50

https://sites.google.com/site/unoallavo ... ects=0&d=1

At 5 minutes plus 3 seconds Lc0 on RTX2070 and Brainfish on i7 7490S 6 cores

1 BrainFish_181219_x64 +6 +6/=39/-5 51.00% 25.5/50
2 Lc0_41439 -6 +5/=39/-6 49.00% 24.5/50

https://sites.google.com/site/unoallavo ... ects=0&d=1

At 25 minutes plus 10 seconds RTX2070

1 Lc0_41439 +13 +4/=44/-2 52.00% 26.0/50
2 BrainFish_181219 -13 +2/=44/-4 48.00% 24.0/50

https://sites.google.com/site/unoallavo ... ects=0&d=1

So it seems that series 40 scales better than previous series of Lc0 and it is stronger, and keep learning!

In spite of the victory of Lc0 on RTX2070 at 25+10, BrainFish won the following game in only 22 movs.
Lc0 started to compute at move 6 while BrainFish begun at move 10.

[pgn][Event "CerebellumLc041439"] [Site "J-PC"] [Date "2019.03.10"] [Round "55"] [White "BrainFish_181219_x64_bmi2"] [Black "Lc0_41439"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B12"] [WhiteElo "2200"] [BlackElo "2200"] [PlyCount "44"] [EventDate "2019.??.??"] [TimeControl "1500+10"] 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. c3 e6 5. Nf3 Nd7 6. Be2 h6 {-0.55/13 43} 7. O-O a6 {-0.52/13 16} 8. h3 c5 {-0.52/13 63} 9. Be3 Bh7 {-0.50/17 38} 10. c4 { 0.79/30 44} Ne7 {-0.56/23 14} 11. Nc3 {0.94/30 27} cxd4 {-0.69/27 26} 12. Nxd4 {0.94/32 53} dxc4 {-0.69/18 0} 13. Bh5 {1.09/31 23} g6 {-0.93/20 43} 14. Bf3 { 1.34/30 34} Rb8 {-1.11/24 19} 15. Qa4 {1.33/32 21} g5 {-0.64/28 59} 16. Rfd1 { 1.64/30 19} Qc8 {0.24/20 66} 17. Rac1 {1.94/32 22} Ng6 {-0.11/27 51} 18. Ne4 { 5.30/34 19} b5 {-12.67/15 61} 19. Nxb5 {5.71/33 22} axb5 {-14.82/15 22} 20. Rxd7 {5.82/35 22} Bg7 {-14.76/14 28} 21. Qa7 {5.60/36 52} O-O {-14.99/13 24} 22. Nd6 {5.73/37 24} Nxe5 {normal -13.76/12 72 Black resigns} 1-0 [/pgn]

In the following, Lc0 started to compute at move 9 while BrainFish begun at move 19, despite which Lc0 won.


[pgn][Event "CerebellumLc041439"] [Site "J-PC"] [Date "2019.03.12"] [Round "66"] [White "Lc0_41439"] [Black "BrainFish_181219_x64_bmi2"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B90"] [WhiteElo "2200"] [BlackElo "2200"] [PlyCount "142"] [EventDate "2019.??.??"] [TimeControl "1500+10"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. f3 Be7 9. Qd2 {0.42/14 24} Nbd7 10. g4 {0.42/16 34} O-O 11. O-O-O {0.40/20 44} b5 12. g5 {0.40/21 41} Nh5 13. Kb1 {0.40/19 0} Nb6 14. Na5 {0.42/22 34} Rc8 15. a3 {0.47/22 45} g6 16. Rg1 {0.30/21 75} Qc7 17. Nd5 {0.31/26 9} Nxd5 18. exd5 { 0.29/23 26} Bd7 19. c4 {0.47/21 44} bxc4 {0.00/35 76} 20. Rc1 {1.32/24 76} Bb5 {0.00/30 17} 21. Bxc4 {1.64/17 61} Bxc4 {-0.36/39 366} 22. Rxc4 {2.09/17 46} Qd7 {-0.40/32 21} 23. Nc6 {2.18/16 19} Rfe8 {-0.55/33 35} 24. Ka2 {1.96/13 133} Bf8 {0.00/30 24} 25. Qc2 {1.96/12 0} Ra8 {0.00/36 51} 26. h4 {1.90/14 35} Qh3 { 0.00/37 61} 27. Qg2 {2.36/14 55} Qd7 {-0.31/36 110} 28. Qg4 {2.30/14 99} Qc7 { 0.00/32 14} 29. a4 {2.33/16 19} f5 {0.00/38 92} 30. Qg2 {2.27/16 13} Qf7 { 0.00/35 97} 31. Rd1 {2.31/14 36} f4 {-0.10/37 32} 32. Bf2 {2.25/14 39} Ng7 { -0.43/38 79} 33. Qf1 {2.26/13 90} a5 {-0.18/37 55} 34. Qd3 {2.42/11 63} Nf5 { -0.67/36 151} 35. b3 {2.30/11 37} Be7 {-0.58/32 54} 36. Rdc1 {2.77/11 35} Bf8 { -0.73/33 85} 37. Rg1 {2.52/11 69} Ne7 {-0.81/36 53} 38. Rd1 {2.39/14 16} Nf5 { -0.67/33 13} 39. Ka3 {2.61/11 78} Kh8 {-0.52/28 51} 40. Bb6 {3.33/11 24} Nxh4 { -0.94/33 106} 41. Bxa5 {4.29/15 28} Be7 {-1.69/33 131} 42. Rg1 {5.04/14 31} Qf5 {-1.44/30 26} 43. Rc3 {5.03/16 30} h6 {-1.85/30 39} 44. gxh6 {5.00/14 0} Kh7 { -1.89/28 23} 45. Bb6 {5.07/15 64} Bf6 {-1.49/26 7} 46. Qe4 {5.05/16 8} Qh3 { -2.18/29 16} 47. Na7 {5.23/14 32} Reb8 {-2.25/27 43} 48. Bf2 {6.70/15 55} Nf5 { -2.73/31 23} 49. Rc7+ {7.11/16 24} Kxh6 {-3.32/30 12} 50. Rcc1 {6.69/16 12} Kg7 {-3.22/30 8} 51. Rg4 {6.72/14 0} Kh7 {-3.39/29 11} 52. Rcg1 {10.11/13 65} Rg8 { -4.03/27 10} 53. Nc6 {10.58/12 20} Rg7 {-4.53/29 10} 54. Qd3 {13.99/14 46} Qh2 {-4.86/27 9} 55. Qf1 {22.08/12 39} Kg8 {-4.77/29 7} 56. Rh1 {23.76/12 29} Ng3 { -6.62/29 12} 57. Rxg3 {23.61/14 15} fxg3 {-6.82/30 8} 58. Rxh2 {22.34/14 13} gxh2 {-6.76/30 11} 59. Bg3 {22.70/13 15} Rh7 {-7.30/31 10} 60. Bxh2 {22.78/12 14} Rxh2 {-5.82/26 6} 61. Qg1 {23.23/11 13} Rh6 {-7.40/28 12} 62. a5 {23.51/10 25} Kh7 {-7.19/24 10} 63. Ka4 {25.03/9 49} Rh4+ {-7.56/25 9} 64. b4 {23.87/10 22} Kh6 {-7.88/25 10} 65. Kb5 {26.17/8 13} Rf4 {-7.40/23 6} 66. a6 {24.15/9 16} Bh4 {-7.77/27 12} 67. Qh1 {23.66/9 15} Kg5 {-8.21/27 9} 68. a7 {26.02/8 13} Kf6 {-8.88/23 10} 69. Qh3 {28.04/8 8} Bf2 {-9.22/24 10} 70. Qd7 {27.92/9 8} Kg5 { -10.02/26 10} 71. Qxd6 {30.35/9 8} Rff8 {adjudication -10.39/25 9 Arena Adjudication} 1-0 [/pgn]